is asymmetrical warfare the ultimate evolution of war? We haven't

File: 1455419551325.png (831KB, 1400x1000px) Image search: [Google]

831KB, 1400x1000px

You quit being a pussy and round up the trouble makers and nail them to some wood the old fashion Roman way.

Asymmetric warfare isn't new and it isn't quite effective as you would like to meme

It's beaten by occupation, money, and time. Look at Columbia.

The problem is people think guerrilla warfare should be like a regular war but it's more about building up the country you're occupying so becoming a radical seems like a more shit option than trying to work within the system. Again, see Columbia.

>>32050020
>Columbia
Columbia, Which one.

Guerillia IED warfare seems incredibley effective.

It would be very easy to eliminate 99.9% of helicopters/A-10 type of aircraft via AA-IED's, but we won't see them used until someone tries to pull one on Iran or a country with a decent EE, ME, and CIS University.

>>32050054


Sorry, I'm retarded. Meant Colombia.

File: drones.jpg (6KB, 299x168px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 299x168px

if the US army cant stop a bunch of illiterate suicidal teenagers, how the hell can it stop these

>>32050134
>4 3 volt DC motors and a radio controller are a credible, un-counterale threat
You do know electronic warfare has existed for going on 100 years now
When will this meme die

File: 1462038605237.png (37KB, 240x240px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 240x240px

asymmetrical warfare as in guerrilla warfare?
>Numbers
if the insurgency is small enough (like 50-100 or even 200 if you stretch it that far) it'll be easily defeated, they'll have casualties everytime they do an attack and eventually die out (Especially if your hypothetical conventional army,trained competently enough)

however, if they're > 500, then you're in deep trouble.

>Culture
What kind of people are you fighting?
Are the civvies in solidarity with the insurgents? (Iraq,Palestine..) Then expect to find ""civilians"" (see:future insurgent) hiding guns,ammunition,IED equipment and smuggling food/supplies to insurgents, and even reconning at some point.

Or do they not support them or even hate them? (Tunisia,Libya,Algeria,Europe...) then expect the militia to be heavily reliant on raiding civilians' house and will be heavily demoralized because lolnosupplies (In tunisia, ISIS militants were cornered in the Chaanbi mountain and cut out of supplies so bad they starved and resorted to raiding and stealing from farmers' houses)

Fanaticism; Do the insurgent not fear death? is his motives religious or political?

>Training
What kind of training does your average insurgent have?
are the insurgents (or some of them) well trained enough where they can rely solely on themselves in firefights,making IEDs,knowing guerrilla tactics,good leadership, Etc?

Or is it the first time the insurgent hold an AK?

Can the insurgents use a sniper rifle effectively? (this a huge power multiplier here, look up 'Juba the sniper')

Can every insurgent make an IED all by himself? (You're in deep trouble if this is true,Expect an IED every street corner and basically you're fucked because your armor has no power here, kick up those infantrymen, you're gonna need alot of em)

>Equipment
Are they equipped enough where they can efficiently take out enemy armour? How much IEDs can they make? How many rocket launchers do they have?

is the insurgency funded by an external country? :^)

1/2

File: ghandi.png (376KB, 674x674px) Image search: [Google]

376KB, 674x674px

>>32050281
>Situation
Are you an invading (Iraq/afghanistan) or defending force (Chechnya,Tunisia,Mali...etc)?
if you're invading then you're gonna have a hard time proving yourself against the populace because you're new to them
Also 'hearts and minds' bullshit (i.e not harassing non-combatants and trying to win the love of natives)

which i don't believe in anyway because it displays your army as a bunch of pansy ass panderers which gives the insurgency more morale and THEY WILL IN FACT EXPLOIT IT like iraq when they used non-combatants as recce's and supply mules

So if you've got the worst situations, the insurgency will win and eventually turn into a conventional force.

>>32050281
>>32050312
also source: Official US army COIN manual, and lots of other books, and tons of analysing guerrilla warfare incidents around the world.

i'm so autistic about guerrillas

>>32050281
>>32050312
>Numbers
Numbers can work against you as as well, the larger your group is the larger amount of supplies and coordination you will need which increases your chances of being slowed down or intercepted. Planning becomes an issue as with any large group. Vetting members would become more difficult and infiltration becomes easier.

Everything else becomes pretty irrelevant if the occupying force has enough resources and balls to handle the insurgency with grit. City dwellers aren't that big of a deal as they can be watched and monitored, its the goddamn tribals in the rural areas who import weapons and cause trouble, round them up and relocate or kill them and your insurgency will be hard pressed to import weapons and carry out attacks.

After all who were some of the first people shooting at the redcoats in the revolution? A bunch of goddamn farmers

File: c69acf18c3733587140a17f41d3285d7.jpg (41KB, 564x564px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 564x564px

>>32049984
sun tzu has it on lock
.ie troll the fuck out of your enemy

File: Drone11111111-640x480.jpg (44KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 640x480px

numbers don't matter
weapons do...
beautiful thing about programming, is it is super scalable

>>32050312

But isn't the insurgency becoming a conventional force a good thing as that means you can finally focus down on them for good?

I think the solution to Asymmetrical warfare is to wait for the insurgents to mature into an easily harvested crop, which likewise discourages civilian support as said civilians find themselves under the bootheel of the now professional military they have to supply yet never asked for. It's the difference between being an "occupier" and being a "liberator".

>>32050462
>Ahmed finally drives out imperialist infidels, creates caliphate
>Has to stand at check point all day
>"I wish i was still making IEDs"

>>32050462
>But isn't the insurgency becoming a conventional force a good thing as that means you can finally focus down on them for good?

Think about it, by 'focus down for good' on them you mean start using more airstrikes,mortars,arty,missiles,Armour,etcetc
But what would the consequences of that?


Torn down buildings,more dead and heavily displaced civilians, full crisis,shit goes nuts,Civvies disgrunted and start creating their OWN GUERRILLAS (see:Yemen or libya) And there may even be a chance that opportunistic militias/outside armies may try to take over (see: Syria:Kurds and US) (also see:Iraq: Shi'ite OMS created by Iran and used disgruntled civilians to their advantage)

ESPECIALLY if the new conventional rebel force reaches the level of competence of your local army (i.e in terms of weapons and manpower)
And as we all know, if the rebels/guerillas actually manage to get on your army's level, you're fucked because:
Think about it, all rebel/terrorists started small, they've started growing and growing, and when you try to cut them down, whoops, too late nigger, they are now an official army that's as competent as yours. and 99% of the times where insurgents reach your Level, your country will end up syria,libya or one of those african shitholes like Congo.

>Tl;DR don't let the guerrillas have the ability to have a foothold and cut em before it's too late (See;Tunisia and algeria mopped up the ISIS insurgencies because actually competent armies and police forces exist there so they've managed to gg-no-re the guerrillas before it's too late.)

>>32050402
When talking about numbers, we're talking about the guerrillas only, your side's numbers are ---mostly--- irrelevant most of the time

>>32050561
>Ahmed finally drives out imperialist infidels, creates caliphate
>Has to stand at check point all day
>imdaad never gave up the game and keeps trying to akbar Ahmed

>>32050573
I am talking about guerilla forces. Large organizations like the former Al Qadia have weaknesses of communication problems, organization, vetting and all that crap. Probably funding issues when the Saudi Prince's check comes late.

I know AQ is/was an international terrorist organization but I feel the same issues would apply to a nation wide insurgency

>>32050608
oh, good point.

It is because we need to respect certain guidelines they wont respect, or they will use them to their advantage.
That is, until some power says "Fuck it, its mongol time" and pulls a Khwarazmian on their asses.

File: 1432520299282.jpg (123KB, 780x690px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 780x690px

>>32049984
Do you realise that asymmetric warfare is warfare between unequal forces, or forces using radically different strategies? It's been around forever.

>>32050010
>round up

Man you're right, we should just go grab all the clearly marked obvious bad dudes that love to stand in the open holding up "I am a bad guy round me up" signs and execute them. It's not like they hide or evade our militaries in any way shape or form. They just love getting caught and shipped off to military prisons right? I can't believe nobody every thought of just shooting them before :^)

>>32050856

Wasn't the Peninsula war asymmetrical warfare?